# Behind the Curtain — Research Appendices Six edition-matched research tools. These exercises organize questions and evidence; they do not establish diagnoses, verify allegations, or confer legal authority. ## Appendix A — Read the evidence in layers Separate what happened from what someone inferred. What exact claim am I examining? What is the original source, date and locator? What did this source directly observe or record? Which parts are interpretation or proposal? What remains unknown, and what evidence would change my conclusion? ## Appendix B — Compare two sources Find out whether agreement is independent corroboration. Source A: creator, date, title and exact locator Source B: creator, date, title and exact locator Do they rely on the same witness or underlying record? Where do they agree, differ, or qualify the claim? What can I conclude without choosing an unsupported version? ## Appendix C — Build a two-date timeline Keep the event date separate from the disclosure date. Event or reported occurrence and its date or range When did this information become public? What contemporary record supports it? What later source changes or qualifies the account? What was knowable then, and what remains uncertain now? ## Appendix D — Read an interview closely Trace the speaker’s knowledge and preserve qualifications. Program, speaker, interviewer, date and locator Did I inspect recording, transcript, or interview summary? What question was the speaker answering? What could the speaker know directly, and what was attributed? Which qualification, disagreement or missing context must travel with the quotation? ## Appendix E — Check a digital appearance Distinguish an authorized message from live participation. Original publisher, URL, date and preserved context Was this live interaction, a recording, or an authorized prepared message? What independent recording or witness is available? What origin or integrity evidence can I actually inspect? What is verified, unverified, or outside what this material can establish? ## Appendix F — Stress-test a reform proposal Apply the same standard when political power changes hands. Which documented failure does the proposal address? What authority exists, and what would require new law or another process? Who evaluates evidence, who decides, and who can challenge the result? How does it protect both an impaired leader and a capable leader? Would I accept this rule for the other party, and what pilot result would change it?